Using Modules to Teach General Chemistry

In Fall semester 1999, the year after Betsy and David taught Chem 111 using modules, neither one taught the class--Betsy instead taught Physical Chemistry, and David took a sabbatical leave. Again, five sections of Chem 111 were offered. Two sections were taught by two faculty new to UST (both in one-year sabbatical replacement positions) and unexperienced with teaching with modules. A non-tenure-track faculty member who taught the extended section the previous year taught the third regular section. An adjunct instructor, familiar with UST but not with teaching with modules, took the extended section, and the honors section was taught by the same tenured professor as the previous year.

The three "regular" sections of Chem 111 were then taught by other UST faculty. More important, the responsibility for coordinating the General Chemistry courses was reassigned by the chair from Betsy to the faculty member in the five-year position. However, this individual did not buy into the module system and did not attempt to keep the general chemistry instructors moving forward with the development of a modular approach. Moreover, one of the sabbatical replacement instructors refused to present any module-based material and even spoke ill of the materials in front of the class. Consequently, student dissatisfaction became a persistent issue, and the gains made in Year One (1998-99) by Betsy and David were generally lost during Year Two (1999-2000).

Beginning Fall 2000, Betsy took a maternity leave from the chemistry department, and David took over coordinating the general chemistry sections. The three regular sections were taught by David, the five-year appointee, and a new sabbatical replacement instructor, and the other two sections were taught by the same faculty as the previous year. David and another instructor taught two of the regular sections as they were in 1998, and although the instructors found themselves still fighting against student expectations, it was nonetheless a good year for using modules. Within the department, faculty were still divided over whether the modules were effective and worth the trouble.

By Fall 2001, the chemistry department--unable to agree on whether to "go modular"--struck a compromise for the sake of damping departmental conflict and stress. Rather than complete its original plan for a three-year test of modules, the department instead used the modules as a kind of capstone experience in all five Chem 111 sections.

In the course of writing up this case study, we attempted to contact Betsy and learned she had opted not to return from her leave and subsequently resigned her position at UST. We then contacted David Boyd--now the department chair--and he reported that because some members of the department held strong feelings about the use of modules, it was not likely that modules would be used in subsequent offerings of Chem111 as extensively as was originally proposed by Betsy.